Self-defense shooting(?) in Seattle leads to murder charge

[American123]

I've noticed that practiced by many of the major new media folks too.

IMHO....it's clearly racist and disgusting.

Aloha, Mark

What it shows is how widespread is the narrative that is being pushed. It permeates about every system, program, and industry. It's far easier to claim X people are unjustly sent to jail when the majority of reported crime conveniently leaves out X skin color when communicated to the public.

I'm currently contemplating the concept of "freewill" and "freedom of choice" as how it relates to the "equity and equality" rhetoric, I was explaining to someone recently (who didn't appreciate what I was saying) that if humans have free will, and we have freedom of choice for decisions we make in our lives, there can be no such thing as "equity or equality" because for such to exist ignores the reality that the decisions we make (of free will) contribute and directly influence our life outcomes/experiences.

Taking it back to the original topic, people who make decisions to commit violent crime, join gangs, involve themselves with drugs, devalue educating themselves or learning a lawfully marketable skill, then experience the outcomes of those decisions, but then of course that reality sucks, so blaming it on a boogeyman transfers the blame away from their own choices to the larger society....

 

[WillametteWill]

but then of course that reality sucks, so blaming it on a boogeyman transfers the blame away from their own choices to the larger society....

I hear the sound of a nail being hit squarely on the head.

 

[American123]

I hear the sound of a nail being hit squarely on the head.

That was some cool figurative language.

 

[Caveman Jim]

What gets me is these liberal justice warrior DA's and judges in liberal controlled sh!tholes keep letting these violent miscreants loose to reoffend and when they attack an armed person they charge them instead of the miscreants!!!
Sure this one expired but how many times did he do the same GD thing and was out on the streets???

 

[sobo]

...
Sure this one expired but how many times did he do the same GD thing and was out on the streets???

At least 8 times...

 

[Caveman Jim]

At least 8 times...

Exactly my point, it's too bad that he didn't get ahold of a bunch of politicians.
Then I'm certain he would've been put away for life.

 

[bbbass]

There has been an attack on "responsibility" for many decades. Nowadays, only the people that believe in it are held responsible. Everybody else gets a pass. POF (People of Favor or "protected classes") especially so.

 

[ma96782]

At least 8 times...

Politicians have an agenda.......using "useful idiots" just works.

Aloha, Mark

.

 

[Galant]

It's a long watch (45 mins) but I highly recommend it.

Saying only the perfect words right shooting someone might be more difficult than you think. Accidentally slipping one wrong word might be really easy. Ymmv

 

[AshWilliams]

It's worth pointing out that the guy suffered from mental illness. In the analysis of the video he is seen talking to himself and gesturing in front of the church.

 

[awshoot]

It's worth pointing out that the guy suffered from mental illness. In the analysis of the video he is seen talking to himself and gesturing in front of the church.

Where did you see the video? I know I've seen it somewhere but can't find it anymore.

 

[AshWilliams]

Where did you see the video? I know I've seen it somewhere but can't find it anymore.

I didn't watch the video as it hasn't been released, but I did read a few different sources describing the detectives' analysis of the video.

If you find it when/if it's released let us know.

 

[WillametteWill]

So I re-watched the "Don't talk to police" video posted above by @Galant during my workout today (thanks for contributing this to the conversation!) There are of course valid points in the video. However, at no time in this video is the very different process for an affirmative self defense situation brought up. I would suggest that there is limited and specific information that will be helpful if communicated to the police after a use of force. The video below is actually from a class I attended in Arizona just a few months ago, Deadly Force Instructor. Have also attended MAG 40 which is about half shooting and half armed citizen's rules of engagement. Spent 18 years as an LEO and have been training new and advanced officers for 25 years, including how to interview people. What I'm finding is that about half of my training currently is not about the shooting part, but all the legal, documentation, training, research...the stuff other than shooting. I've spoken with attorneys who advise they basically received no training in law school on how to defend an innocent person in a self defense case. The above video notes that in federal cases, 86% of those charged plead guilty before the case goes to trial. There are may nuances to this so having multiple sources posting is great.

Both the above video and one by Massad Ayoob on what to say to the police are in post #56 of THIS THREAD. Ayoob's is shorter, about 12 minutes, and was part of an ASP video made during a break in class.

 

[Rascal01]

As @No_Regerts alluded to, it is much more complex than not saying anything. For example, George Zimmerman would absolutely been convicted had he not provided the initial officers enough information to turn the dynamic into a possible self defense case. That sinks in for me.

As I have said in about five other threads, if you are guilty or really messed up a "self-defense" shooting, then yes, shut up and talk with an attorney. But in a legitimate SD case, lawful gun carriers should have a much better plan that includes very limited and specific information you need to tell the police...and then request you lawyer.

Request a lawyer? From who? The police? A judge? The Prosecutor? That's asking the police for a right that has already been constitutionally provided. You already have the right to legal representation.

Yes, we are going to talk to the police. That is required, necessary and expected. We are going to fully cooperate with law enforcement throughout the investigative process. We will provide all information available in a candid, cooperative and forthright manner.

But my first call goes to the police and my second to my lawyer immediately following notifying the police. Take me to jail? Go ahead. My lawyer can meet me there and provide council.

I'll cooperate fully with police when I know my rights are being protected. If you have to ask police for permission to contact your lawyer, or to provide you a lawyer, you are already off to a bad start.

How anyone chooses to handle this is up to them. This is a big deal. It could be freedom or the gallows. For me, a corpse and my smoking gun equals legal representation.

 

[awshoot]

Request a lawyer? From who? The police? A judge? The Prosecutor? That's asking the police for a right that has already been constitutionally provided. You already have the right to legal representation.
...

Asking for an attorney is to affirmatively set a point in time beyond the police may not discuss the matter, and if they do, can't use those discussions in court. It may not a pure Bill of Rights interpretation, but it is what is going to be used in our legal process.

 

[Rascal01]

I understand. That would not change my actions. As I have noted before, the best time to discuss this matter with a legal representative is before an incident occurs. That should enable the shooter to provide the maximum level of cooperation with police without risk to self.

What has not been touched on is jurisdictional differences. There can be very substantial differences in statutes and police departments with respect to the law and department policy. My son worked for a department that enforced the law in 2 states and the District of Columbia. Not only did he have to complete the academy, he had to complete the legal requirements of all 3 jurisdictions before hitting the street.

 

[awshoot]

... There can be very substantial differences in ... police departments with respect to the law and department policy. ...

That's important -- here in WA you can be in one town and the interpretation of events will be treated very differently than in a town 200 miles away on the other side of the state. It's important to know where you are in the ideological sense.

 

[oldcorpgunny]

I could have sworn I saw a video clip of this shooting but can't find it now.

Anyway, there is more info here: Seattle man charged with manslaughter, accused of fatally shooting man in U-District parking lot

In my recollection of the video, Siciliano punched Lundvall, which seems to be something he likes to do (and of course, he has faced no legal consequences): Suspect charged in sucker-punch attack on Orthodox priest arrested 8 times since 2017

• Siciliano punched a priest in Burien in a random attack while the priest was pumping gas,
• The next day he threatened to kill a bus driver,
• Two days later, he's on video hitting a woman in Seattle -- randomly of course,
• Before these incidents he assualted someone at the Union Gospel Mission,
• And he also assaulted an employee of the Downtown Emergency Center

The above story about Siciliano is from 2019 so clearly, nothing really came of any of his assaults.

If anyone can point me to the video though, I'd appreciate it.

He was a good boy when he wasn't pounding on innocents. People just needed be more patient with the boy. Someone reach over and flush this thing.

 

[Wombat of Doom]

I think that's just for Mental Health purposes. I believe they have to charge you or release you. If they charge you then you await a judge to determine bail if the DA asks for it (flight risk)

Mental health is NOT 3 days in Oregon. It is 5 business days of the court and the day the hold is placed does not count. The 72 hours is a now defunct California statute. I have seen a hospital hold last 10 days around the holidays. I believe Washington's is closer to Oregon`s but I have never put someone on a hold in Washington

 

[Wombat of Doom]

I think that's just for Mental Health purposes. I believe they have to charge you or release you. If they charge you then you await a judge to determine bail if the DA asks for it (flight risk)

Mental health is NOT 3 days in Oregon. It is 5 business days of the court and the day the hold is placed does not count. The 72 hours is a now defunct California statute. I have seen a hospital hold last 10 days around the holidays.